Home » Blogs » Country Singer Faith Hill: “The NRA Needs to Tell the Truth About Guns”

Country Singer Faith Hill: “The NRA Needs to Tell the Truth About Guns”

Robert Farago - comments No comments

I’m not sure what country singer Faith Hill (above) wants the National Rifle Association to tell the The Truth About Guns. Stop hectoring us for not reaching out to minority communities? Don’t slate us for legitimizing and empowering ATF bureaucrats? Shut up about our support for the NFA? Not gonna happen…the NRA’s PR flacks blacklisted TTAG a long time ago.

Anyway, in a highly edited Q&A Billboard cover story, Ms. Hill reacted to the Las Vegas spree killing by calling for a new “assault weapons” ban . . .

In reference to the tragedy in Las Vegas, we knew a lot of people there. The doctors that [treated] the wounded, they saw wounds like you’d see in war. That’s not right. Military weapons should not be in the hands of civilians. It’s everyone’s responsibility, including the government and the National Rifle Association, to tell the truth. We all want a safe country.

Ms. Hill’s partner, country singer Tim McGraw, had this to say about that:

“Look, I’m a bird hunter — I love to wing-shoot . . . However, there is some common sense that’s necessary when it comes to gun control. They want to make it about the Second Amendment every time it’s brought up. It’s not about the Second Amendment.”

Which is another way of saying “pay no attention to that natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms behind that curtain.”

Generally speaking, country singers support the RKBA — if only because their rural audience does so with a passion undimmed. Hill and McGraw’s willingness to promote gun control probably reflects a deep personal commitment to civilian disarmament that flies in the face of their commercial interests, rather than a shift in their audience’s support for firearms freedom. Here’s hoping.

0 thoughts on “Country Singer Faith Hill: “The NRA Needs to Tell the Truth About Guns””

  1. Let’s be honest with each other. The Left fully believes that the Right wants a total ban on abortions. The Right fully believes that the Left wants a total ban on guns. They both believe that any “reasonable regulation” is just an incremental step on the “slippery slope” to a total ban. I believe that both of their beliefs are true.

    Reply
  2. Timmy is one of those dummies that thinks the second was written so he could shoot ducks with his two-shot shotgun. Sorry, Timmy. You’re wrong. The English gun bans tell us exactly where this leads. All you have to do is look at Australia. In both cases, the murderers kept on using what was available, the banners kept banning, and in the end even the ‘wing-shooters’ were left with nothing.

    Reply
  3. “they saw wounds like you’d see in war”
    Because the wounds made by a shotgun are so much less devastating that a 556 round.
    (I will give it to you that a shotgun is range limited)

    Reply
  4. Correction to sentence #1, which was written as “Women are different than men.”:

    “Different than” is not English at all, at least not in America. “Different from” is.

    I think Mr. Taylor, who is a very good writer, may have picked up this habit from the Brits, but if they do use that wording (I’m not sure, because we don’t live on the other side of the world), it’s still wrong in the U.S, period, end of story.

    Reply
  5. I’d like to hear the truth about her super secluded home in Franklin and all the security cameras and alarms they have. Not to mention all the times that she is covered by security personnel, especially the ones armed with bullet shooters.

    Elitist hypocrite.

    Reply
  6. Seriously, I think SO much of the thoughts on public matters of ordinary-looking showbiz people who talk funny and sing bad poetry for money, one of whom dresses like a street whore and the other of whom wears a plastic ‘Gangnam Style’ cowboy hat that would get a real cowboy driven off the range in shame, that I’m going to call The Authorities to come get all of my guns and ammunition to have them destroyed, vote straight Democrat from now on, and later today I’m going outside to scream at the sky until the 2nd Amendment is repealed.
    Cucking Felebrities. . .

    Reply
  7. Just another couple of people who think their opinions carry more weight because folks know their names – but haven’t the sense to keep ignorant opinions to themselves to avoid demonstrating their lack of actual understanding of the topic. ????

    Reply
  8. As ther support gun control, they can lead by example. Little Timmy can get got PR by turn his guns in at the local police office. Oh yes, his ammunition, knives and such. He and faith can then disarm their sucurity people. Come on when was the last time one of them stood over them and ended a deranged gun carrying mental case?

    Reply
  9. Is it just me, or did they forget to define semiautomatic rifle? They define semiautomatic handgun, semiautomatic shotgun, then jump right to semiautomatic assault rifle, and reference a never defined semiautomatic rifle.

    Reply
  10. The Democrats are attacking our second amendment rights to no end. By fighting these communist who don’t believe in “our bill of rights” all the way till we win again. By summoning our greatest Ally the NRA we shall succeed!

    Reply
  11. I’ve only been a gun owner for a few years now and truthfully I didn’t care much about gun laws prior to that. But since that day I have tended to vote more on the republican side if only to preserve this one civil liberty from the left who constantly wages war on it. I voted for Trump in 2016 because I felt that 2A would be in great jeopardy in the hands of Clinton and left when it comes to appointing judges. I will vote for him again in 2020 if only to make sure that we keep anti-2A justices off of the supreme court. Once I know that gun rights are secure then I am willing to consider other issues.

    Reply
  12. I get what you’re saying. What I don’t understand is why no Republicans seems to be crafting a more acceptable piece of legislation. I and many other gun owners are in favor of common sense reform and would be grateful for reasonable steps toward compromise. Just digging in and opposing this legislation isn’t helping us progress beyond the divide. And doing nothing doesn’t seem acceptable in the face of so much grief across our country.

    Reply
  13. Faith Hill is NOT a “country singer”. A standard programmed new age “act” selected by a promoter for sex appeal/window dressing. Then handed music to sing. If they wanted/needed a “rap”, jazz, or _____ “singer” that week she wouldn’t be a “country singer”.

    Reply
  14. They will never take my Glock 17 It’s is in the second amendment. They are a bunch of pencil pushing son of a Bitches!! And you are not Fucking with my pain medicine either! This is the United States of America! And I am a AMERICAN CITIZEN!

    Reply
  15. Translation: “I’m a psychiatrist, so I don’t know shit.”

    And yet he knows enough to prescribe powerful psychoactive drugs to his patients. Interesting, no?

    Reply
  16. “…the only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in America is its astronomical number of guns.”

    So much fail.

    Reply
    • Except guns have been plentiful for generations, semi-automatics have been around for over 100 years, gun control laws have gotten more, not less stringent inn that time, yet this plague of mass shootings seems to have arisen mostly since the advent of social media.

      Reply
  17. It is sad that probably all these folks either didn’t feel the need to own a gun, or left their’s home, or in the car. I hope now, this will be a wake up call.
    If the old biddy next to you feels “Threatened” because she notices the butt of your 44 mag, sticking out from your jacket, tell he to go “Piss up a rope”!

    Reply
  18. Correct, the doctors seeing wounds similar to war………glad they weren’t hollow points huh. Tim McGraw, buddy I like country but that shotgun shit just won’t fly around here .WWaiiiiiit he’s saying what he thinks needs saying to save his fan ratings, no true convictions besides monetary gains . . Vermin of the worst kind

    Reply
  19. Not a caption, but this photo is (somewhat obviously) from a 1980s music video but I can’t come up with the band or the song. Anybody?

    Reply
  20. It is GREAT ammo, It used to be REALLY good reloading Brass also. Great ammo in my short barrels. Come to think of it most anything from IMI is good.

    Reply
  21. You’re thanks is greatly appreciated by this veteran. In hindsight of the subsequent 100 years since, “The War to End All Wars”, has really been more like, “The War To Start All Wars.” It’s pretty amazing, we’re still dealing with the aftershocks of that conflict.

    Reply
  22. “…our focus should be on preventing criminals and the seriously mentally ill from obtaining any type of firearm. Since 2013, the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s FixNICS initiative has improved reporting…”

    You see, this is the problem. Why are supposed pro-gun, pro Second Amendment groups spending time and money trying to fix something that is by its very nature and application a violation of the Second amendment and unconstitutional?

    This is the same blind spot the NRA had on NFA and NICS in the first place. Trying to make political points with the gun muggles rather than standing fast for the text of the Second Amendment.

    Note, please – if they are not in custody/confinement, be they criminals/felons or mentally ill, they WILL find, carry and use firearms if that’s what floats their boar and serves their needs at the time and chipping away at the protections of the Second Amendment is not the way to change that.

    Reply
  23. Please read this article – I did not write it but I totally believe and agree with it pertaining to guns from a Christian perspective.

    Christian men & guns

    By Jeff Quinn of Gunblast.com

    I have been asked on occasion how I can justify carrying a gun and being a Christian at the same time. This is always posed by someone who is trying to trip me up. It can either be a devout Christian asking the question, or a Hedonistic heathen; it doesn’t matter. There are those who believe, or choose to believe, that a Christian must be absolutely passive in all things. I am not just referring to those Christians who ride a horse and buggy. I have been asked about my views on self defense by Christians of most every denomination. Some are genuinely seeking an answer. Others just want to chastise me for not being as “faithful” as themselves.

    Many will accept every modern worldly convenience, but scoff at the idea of trying to protect oneself or the life of another. Their attitude seems to be that “God will protect us”. They do have a valid point. God will protect us from the evils of this world, if he so chooses. I would rather have God on my side than a battery of Sidewinder missiles. Indeed, our God can protect us. However, that attitude would lead one to believe that he could walk through Harlem wearing a Ku Klux Klan outfit campaigning for George Wallace, and that “God will protect us”. God could get you through that, but Jesus said that we should not tempt God. I tend to agree with his assessment.

    In the saddlebag of my motorcycle, I have a tiny cross with the inscription “Faith Moves Mountains”, but I also ride in the mountains of East Tennessee and the western United States, and I make sure that my brakes are in good working order. I could just trust God to catch me, but again, that could be construed as tempting God. God gave us brakes on our motorcycles, and that is sufficient.

    God can indeed protect us. He can keep us safe on the highways, and he can also keep us safe from those who would intentionally do us harm. I am not speaking of politicians here, but of the evil that is in the souls of some human beings. Be certain in this; there is true evil in this world, and it sometimes manifests itself in the form of a low life predator. Being a Christian, it is difficult to believe that people, made of the same composition of flesh, bone, and blood as ourselves, could be truly evil. We have a Heavenly Father who has filled us with basic goodness, but Jesus said that there are those “who are of the synagogue of Satan”.

    No sane individual would hesitate to defend himself from a rabid dog or a poisonous snake, but are the two-legged vipers of this world any better than an animal? An animal does that which comes naturally to him. Children of Satan do that which comes naturally to them: that being evil.

    Can God protect us from those who would do us harm? Absolutely. However, just as he has given us brakes to save us from the mountain, he has also given to us the tools necessary to defend ourselves, and those whom God has given to us. As Christian men, God not only allows us to protect our families, but he expects us to protect those whom he has placed in our care. This may seem contrary to the mandate for us to “turn the other cheek”, and I too have pondered over this. It takes great strength to turn the other cheek as Jesus intended. That is not a commandment to be weak. Jesus did not operate from a position of weakness. In fact, nothing ever happened to him that he did not allow.

    God has entrusted us with the care of our brothers, whether those “brothers” be the children that he has given to us, or our wives, or our friends. We could set our children outside in the cold and trust that God would keep them warm. We could abandon them and trust that God will keep them fed. We could let them loose on the city streets or send them off for a week at Neverland, and trust that no sick, evil freak would abuse them. As Christians, we do not do these things to our children. God expects us to clothe them, feed them, and protect them from the evil that is inherent in this world. He gave to us the ability to buy clothes, grow food, build a fire, and to fight off those who would do us harm. In the time that Jesus walked the Earth in the form of man, the short sword was the state-of-the-art weapon. He told his followers that the time of living carefree was over, and that the time had come for those without a sword to “sell his garment and buy one”.

    Today, we have better than a sword. We have more modern weapons at our disposal, and so does our enemy. Keeping a good rifle to defend one’s homestead and a reliable handgun to ward off evil that finds you when you least expect it is not only prudent, but expected. A Christian man is not mean, hateful, spiteful, or quick to anger. Neither is he weak. God never told us to let the evil in this world run over us like a train. He never toyld us to stand by idly as those whom he trusted to us are abused or killed. A Christian man who packs a gun does not look for trouble, and avoids it if at all possible. However, evil can seek you out.

    A well-armed man operates from a position of strength. He is less likely to have to fight than an unarmed man. The predators in this world look for easy prey. God did not put his people on this Earth to be prey for the sons of Satan. God expects us to stand up for what is right, and he gives us the tools with which to do so. When you defend the life of one of God’s children, you are defending good against evil. Use your good sense and God’s word to avoid trouble. If necessary, use the gun at your side to stand against it.

    Reply
  24. We have much better tools to defend ourselves today. You don’t need to be able to swing a huge club or sword. Samuel Colt evened things up a bit. John Browning, Eugene Stoner, Mikhail Kalashnikov, Gaston Glock and a whole host of other men inspired by God, improved on what he did. All their work gave men and women who aren’t on the upper part of the curve in size and strength a chance against the men who are better able to wield a club or a sword. We have better mental health care, {when it is applied}, better communications, and we are better informed about threats. In the end it still comes down to availing ourselves of these improvements and taking the responsibility to look out for ourselves and those near and dear to us.

    Reply

Leave a Comment